SC Week 2/7: Schrodinger's Outpost

 "I use the term semi-outpost because White can defend that point with a pawn … but does not want to …."

Michael Stean

To end Outpost Week we will take a look at what Stean calls semi-outposts. He mentions the idea as an aside in his chapter on weak pawns, but to my mind it makes more sense to cover them in week 2.

Personally, I think 'pseudo outpost’ makes more sense as a term, but whatever you call them, we’ll talk about squares that … kind of are outposts and yet kind of aren’t.

27 ... Nf4

Spassky - Fischer, World Championship 1972

This is the fifth game from Reykjavik - one of the many famous battes in that match. We will be seeing it again next week. The question for today is, does Fischer’s last move, 26 … Nf4, count as occupying an outpost?

In one sense f4 absolutely isn’t an outpost. White can kick it away with g3 - and Stean’s formulation is very clear - the most important factor in determining an outpost is whether the square is "immune from attack" by enemy pawns.

Here, though, while g2-g3 is legal and certainly an option it comes with problems. In this case, creating a very definite hole on h3 that could potentially be exploited by any of Black’s pieces.

The interesting thing about semi-outposts is that they rely on a judgement call. Is the cure weaknesses that come from covering the outpost worse than leaving it occupied? It’s always going to depend on the specifics of the position.

What Spassky was planning to do about Fischer’s knight, by the way, we’ll never know. He blundered the game away immediately with 27 Qc2??